Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 15:23:36 03/01/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 28, 2001 at 14:13:56, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 28, 2001 at 13:41:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 28, 2001 at 12:19:42, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On February 28, 2001 at 11:46:37, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>> >>>>On February 28, 2001 at 10:54:13, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 28, 2001 at 09:57:06, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On February 28, 2001 at 07:21:44, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On February 27, 2001 at 13:35:33, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On February 27, 2001 at 10:49:29, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On February 27, 2001 at 10:07:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On February 27, 2001 at 08:24:14, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I believe that the drawish move was Qe3! instead of the Qxc6? Can somebody >>>>>>>>>>>post the FEN string that produce the graphical position for me. Plus I wonder >>>>>>>>>>>what program save the draw in the shortest time possible? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>None can see this. It is a 60+ ply repetition. Way beyond anything we can >>>>>>>>>>see today. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>We need to test all the programs in order to say that none can see it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Some programs like dark thought are not available so we cannot know that none >>>>>>>>>can see it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>The fact that it is 60 ply repetition is not a proof that none can see it >>>>>>>>>because programs only to need the right extensions to see the relevant 60 plies >>>>>>>>>forward. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>If you are wrong then testing only one program is enough to prove it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Deep Fritz doesn't see the draw yet after one hour, but it's getting there. Now >>>>>>>>I am trying with Deep Shredder and I might leave one of them computing the >>>>>>>>position overnight. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>What has been the evaluation that came closest to 0.00? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Enrique >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Comp Deep Blue - Kasparov,G >>>>>>>>1r6/5kp1/RqQb1p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P4P/6P1/5K2 b - - 0 1 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Analysis by DEEP FRITZ : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>><SNIP> >>>>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>>>>>> ± (1.00) Depth: 19/50 00:25:38 1907813kN >>>>>>>>45...Qe3! >>>>>>>> ² (0.69) Depth: 20/52 00:56:36 4195172kN >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>(Irazoqui, Cadaqués 27.02.2001) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I have let various versions of Crafty search this position for very long periods >>>>>>>of time in the past. I've had it return what looks like a draw score at around >>>>>>>ply 21 or so, and then at the next ply the score will go back up and the line >>>>>>>will change a lot! I never could figure out why this was. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>BTW, there is a good line posted at the bottom of http://www.rebel.nl/db2.htm >>>>>>>for this position. It looks like Fritz is following it fairly well so far, but >>>>>>>Crafty also looked to be following it when it found the drawscore, then it >>>>>>>changed its mind away from the line, and again the score started to rise. :( >>>>>> >>>>>>Same thing with Deep Fritz. What I find surprising is that Deep Blue expected >>>>>>46... Qxc6, when Deep Fritz, Deep Shredder beta and Junior 7 beta, for instance, >>>>>>pick Qe3 very quickly. >>>>>> >>>>>>Enrique >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Comp Deep Blue - Kasparov,G >>>>>>1r6/5kp1/RqQb1p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P4P/6P1/5K2 b - - 0 1 >>>>>> >>>>>>Analysis by DEEP FRITZ : >>>>>> >>>>>>45...Qxc6 >>>>>> ± (0.91) Depth: 1/6 00:00:00 >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Be7 47.Bd5+ Ke8 48.c7 Rc8 49.Ra7 >>>>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 6/15 00:00:00 10kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Bc7 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Ke7 49.Rxb5 >>>>>> ± (1.37) Depth: 7/16 00:00:00 31kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Bc7 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Ke7 49.Ke2 Kd6 50.Rxb5 >>>>>> +- (1.44) Depth: 8/17 00:00:00 65kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Bc7 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Ke7 49.Ke2 Kd6 50.Rxb5 >>>>>> +- (1.44) Depth: 9/19 00:00:00 115kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Kf8 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Ra8 49.Rxb5 Ra3 50.Rd5 Ke7 >>>>>> +- (1.53) Depth: 10/22 00:00:00 305kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Kf8 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Rc7 49.Rxb5 Ke7 >>>>>> +- (1.56) Depth: 11/21 00:00:00 1078kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Kf8 47.Ra7 Rc8 48.Rb7 Rc7 49.Rxb5 Ke7 >>>>>> +- (1.56) Depth: 12/22 00:00:01 1597kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Rc8 47.Ra5 Ke7 48.Rxb5 h5 49.Bd5 Rb8 50.Rxb8 Bxb8 >>>>>> +- (1.78) Depth: 13/26 00:00:02 3199kN >>>>>>45...Qxc6 46.dxc6 Rc8 47.Ra5 h5 48.Rxb5 h4 49.Rb7+ Rc7 50.Bd5+ Ke7 51.Bxc4 >>>>>> +- (1.84) Depth: 14/26 00:00:06 6898kN >>>>>>45...Qe3! >>>>>> +- (1.81) Depth: 14/39 00:00:21 25200kN >>>>>>45...Qe3! 46.Qd7+ Kg8 47.Qxd6 Rf8 48.Qe6+ Kh7 49.Qe7 Rg8 50.Bf3 Qc1+ 51.Kf2 >>>>>> ± (1.22) Depth: 14/39 00:00:29 34959kN >>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 Re7 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Kg3 Qe1+ 51.Kh3 >>>>>> ± (1.16) Depth: 15/39 00:00:58 71272kN >>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>>>> ± (1.28) Depth: 16/43 00:01:48 133552kN >>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Bf3 >>>>>> ± (1.28) Depth: 17/45 00:04:03 301257kN >>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Bf3 >>>>>> ± (1.28) Depth: 18/46 00:09:44 723368kN >>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>>>> ± (1.06) Depth: 19/50 00:22:41 1678502kN >>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>>>> ± (1.00) Depth: 20/49 01:04:45 4818191kN >>>>>>45...Qe3! >>>>>> ² (0.69) Depth: 21/54 02:32:36 11295715kN >>>>>>45...Qe3! 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.h4 h5 48.Bf3 Qc1+ 49.Kf2 Qd2+ 50.Be2 Qf4+ 51.Kg1 >>>>>> ² (0.31) Depth: 21/54 04:29:02 19961605kN >>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Qd7+ Re7 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 >>>>>> ² (0.31) Depth: 22/57 09:15:31 41587594kN >>>>>>45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Qd7+ Re7 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 >>>>>> ² (0.47) Depth: 23/56 17:29:25 78776519kN, tb=3 >>>>>> >>>>>>(Irazoqui, Cadaqués 28.02.2001) >>>>> >>>>>Compare to the analysis of yace after few hours of playing against itself and >>>>>going back. >>>>> >>>>>1...Qe3 2.Qxd6 Re8 3.Qd7+ Re7 4.Qc6 Qxe4 5.d6 Qd3+ 6.Kg1 Re8 7.Kh2 Qxf5 8.Ra2 >>>>>Rd8 9.Qxb5 Rxd6 10.Qxc4+ Kg6 11.Ra7 Kh7 >>>>> >>>>>It seems that the lines are similiar and I suspect that humans did not analyze >>>>>this line to prove if it is a draw or not a draw. >>>>> >>>>>I did not believe that this traingle Qc6-d6-d7-c6 can be a good idea for white >>>>>but maybe humans are wrong and it is not a draw. >>>>> >>>>>It is clear that deeper blue could not find this idea otherwise the programmer >>>>>could tell the public that it is not a draw so practically kasparov could draw >>>>>by playing Qe3 but it does not answer the question if Qe3 is objectively a draw. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>OK, fine, but obviously Qe3 is the only chance for black and Deep Fritz, Deep >>>>Shredder and Junior 7 beta see it very quickly. If Deep Blue was so extremely >>>>fast, why did it expect Qxc6 and didn't see Qe3? >>>> >>>>Enrique >>> >>>I believe that the answer is simply one of the following or both of them: >>> >>>1)Deeper blue is worse than Deep Fritz and could not see the perpetual because >>>it did not do the right extensions(the main line of Deep Fritz suggests that >>>Deep Fritz can see the perpetual after many hours so it has a main line that >>>avoids it) >> >>This is totally flawed reasoning. For a program to see a perpetual in its >>search, it must meet two conditions. The conditions are summed up in the >>following possibilities: >> >>1. It finds a perpetual it can force, regardless of what the opponent does, >>and it believes that it is losing unless it takes the perpetual. >> >>2. If finds a perpetual the opponent can force, regardless of what it does >>itself, and it believes that the opponent is losing and will choose to take >>the perpetual. > >I believe that Deep Fritz found that the line Qe3 Qxd6 Re8 h4 is not good >because black can force a perpetual check after h4 > >I believe that this is the reason that it changed it's ,mind at depth 22/57 to >the line Qe3 Qxd6 Re8 Qd7+ No draw in sight after 45...Qe3 46.Qxd6 Re8 47.Qd7+ Re7. I give up. Comp Deep Blue - Kasparov,G 8/3Qrkp1/R4p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P1q2P/6P1/5K2 w - - 0 1 Analysis by DEEP FRITZ : 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 ² (0.47) Depth: 3/10 00:00:00 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 ² (0.47) Depth: 3/10 00:00:00 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Qb1+ ² (0.47) Depth: 4/13 00:00:00 1kN 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Qb1+ ² (0.47) Depth: 4/13 00:00:00 1kN 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Qb1+ ² (0.47) Depth: 4/13 00:00:00 1kN 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Qb1+ ² (0.47) Depth: 4/13 00:00:00 1kN 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Qb1+ ² (0.47) Depth: 4/13 00:00:00 1kN 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Qb1+ ² (0.47) Depth: 4/13 00:00:00 1kN 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Qb1+ 51.Kh2 ² (0.50) Depth: 5/13 00:00:00 4kN 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 Rb7 50.Qc6 Qxf5+ 51.Kg1 Qb1+ ² (0.63) Depth: 6/19 00:00:00 11kN 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.d6 Rb7 50.Qc6 Qxf5+ 51.Kg1 Qb1+ 52.Kh2 ² (0.66) Depth: 7/19 00:00:00 27kN 48.Qxb5-- ² (0.34) Depth: 8/21 00:00:00 56kN 48.Qxb5-- Qxe4 49.Qc5 Qd3+ 50.Kg1 Qxc3 51.d6 Qc1+ 52.Kh2 Qf4+ 53.Kh1 Qf1+ = (0.19) Depth: 8/21 00:00:00 104kN 48.Qxb5 Qxe4 49.Qc5 Qd3+ 50.Kg1 Qxc3 51.d6 Qc1+ 52.Kh2 Qf4+ 53.g3 Qd2+ = (0.19) Depth: 9/26 00:00:00 209kN 48.Qc6! = (0.22) Depth: 9/26 00:00:00 280kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxc6 50.Rxc6 Rd7 51.Ke2 g6 52.Rc7 Ke8 53.Rc8+ Kf7 = (0.19) Depth: 10/25 00:00:00 466kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxc6 50.Rxc6 Rd7 51.Rb6 Ke8 52.Ke2 Rd8 53.Ra6 Kd7 ² (0.34) Depth: 11/29 00:00:01 1382kN 48.Qc6 Qf4+ 49.Bf3 Qc1+ 50.Kf2 Qd2+ 51.Kg1 Qe3+ 52.Kh2 Qf4+ 53.g3 Qxf3 ² (0.28) Depth: 12/31 00:00:02 3627kN 48.Qc6 Qf4+ 49.Bf3 Qc1+ 50.Kf2 Qd2+ 51.Kg1 Qe3+ 52.Kh2 Qf4+ 53.Kh1 Qc1+ ² (0.28) Depth: 13/32 00:00:05 7287kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 Qe6 52.Qc5 Kg8 53.b5 f5 = (0.25) Depth: 14/34 00:00:13 15907kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 Qe6 52.Qc5 Kg8 53.b5 f5 = (0.19) Depth: 15/38 00:00:27 32973kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 Qe6 52.Qc5 Kg8 53.b5 f5 = (0.19) Depth: 16/39 00:01:21 98095kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 Qe6 52.Qc5 f5 53.Ra7 Kf6 ² (0.34) Depth: 17/45 00:04:11 294777kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 Qe6 52.Qc5 Kg8 53.b5 Kh7 ² (0.44) Depth: 18/45 00:10:16 723194kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 Qe6 52.Qc5 Kg6 53.b5 f5 ² (0.50) Depth: 19/48 00:30:51 2157708kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qxf5+ 50.Kg1 Rd7 51.Qxb5 Qe6 52.Qc5 Kg6 53.b5 e4 ² (0.44) Depth: 20/50 01:07:13 4718547kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qd3+ 50.Kg1 Re8 51.Qd7+ Kf8 52.Kh2 Qd2 53.Ra1 Qf4+ ² (0.50) Depth: 21/52 03:03:15 12898085kN 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qd3+ 50.Kg1 Re8 51.Qd7+ Kf8 52.Kh2 Qd2 53.Ra1 Qf4+ ² (0.47) Depth: 22/53 07:33:37 32277024kN, tb=1 48.Qc6 Qxe4 49.d6 Qd3+ 50.Kg1 Re8 51.Qd7+ Kf8 52.Kh2 Qd2 53.Ra1 Qf4+ ² (0.44) Depth: 23/57 23:09:21 98589124kN, tb=8 (Irazoqui, Cadaqués 02.03.2001) >I am not sure if the depth 22/57 mean that the longest line is 57 plies and it >is possible that there is a display bug(assuming that you need 60 plies to see >the repetition and 57 is not enough). > >Another possibility is that hash tables helped Fritz to see it in less plies. >It is possible that it found a draw in 57 plies in line A and line B that is 61 >plies leaded to one of the positions from line A so it did not need to search >all the line. > >> >>If a program believes white is losing in this position, then it will think white >>is trying to repeat and black is not. >> >>If a program believes black is losing in this position, then it will think black >>is trying to repeat and white is not. >> >>Those two cases are vastly different. If DB believed (1) and Fritz believes (2) >>then comparing their results of looking for a draw is pointless. >> >>In any case, the forced (absolutely forced by black with white struggling to >>avoid the repetition) requires > 60 plies to see. I don't care _how_ long you >>give fritz, it is _not_ going to be able to find the forced draw. It is simply >>too deep. > >Deep Fritz display depth 22/57 plies after 9:15:31 so depth>60 does not seem >impossible. > >Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.